Fan and Buffy
Content Warning: These stories are about violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation and may include references to suicide or self-harming behaviours. They may contain graphic descriptions and strong language and may be distressing. Some narratives may be about First Nations people who have passed away. If you need support, please see Contact & support.
Buffy wrote to the Royal Commission about her concerns for her mother, Fan, who has schizophrenia. Buffy believes she is ‘highly vulnerable to exploitation and abuse’.
Fan is divorced and lives alone. Buffy says Fan is often confused by traumatic local and world events and finds it hard to understand facts and reality. She struggles to connect with family and friends because she’s hypervigilant and paranoid and doesn’t easily trust.
Recently Fan’s name was removed from the title of her home without her receiving any compensation.
Buffy can’t understand how this happened. Fan had no representation in court. Buffy suspects the court was unaware of her mother’s disability and failed to appoint her a legal guardian or solicitor.
Buffy doesn’t have all the facts, but she suspects the person who requested the court hearing ‘did not have a moral conscience’ and encouraged Fan not to advise her family of her intention to divide her assets.
It seems the paperwork was sent to Buffy’s residential address instead of the office of the public guardian.
Buffy is aware Fan is frightened by the guardianship concept because it ‘removes the very little independence she has’. Fan does not see it as a process that protects her, and without it she can be easily manipulated.
‘My mother … deserves far more fairness and checks and balances in a system to prevent this kind of mistreatment.’
Disclaimer: This is the story of a person who shared their personal experience with the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability through a submission or private session. The names in this story are pseudonyms. The person who shared this experience was not a witness and their account is not evidence. They did not take an oath or affirmation before providing the story. Nothing in this story constitutes a finding of the Royal Commission. Any views expressed are those of the person who shared their experience, not of the Royal Commission.